Oops. Thanks for the typo.

We have had other spread-spectrum rule-makings lately. If you want to experiment with it on HF you should apply for a Special Testing Authority. The problem is, as you obviously already know, getting the existing HF operators to live with it. I didn't specifically address SS, but the bands with wide bandwidth or "Not Specified" can obviously handle it. I thought the document was ambitious enough without talking about spread spectrum.

CSMA doesn't work that well on HF. Sometimes you should be able to share a frequency with distant operators even though they fade in and out, etc. However, it makes sense if you are doing automatic link establishment.

Hi Roscoe,

I want to have my opinions heard. And having notoriety helps. So I do not shy from self-promotion. But the point here is to get people interested in what I wrote, rather than just me.

It might be different if the purpose was just to sell my stuff. This is a non-profit activity.

irst the proposal claims to promote "paperwork reduction" while installing a whole new crazy array of complicated regs ON TOP OF the existing overall rules for reasonable and prudent and good engineering practice and emergency traffic priority or WTF the exact phrases.

You may have been confused by the stuff in the right-hand side of the big table. That's all existing FCC rules. I just moved them to where they'd be seen, instead of having them live in a list of footnotes as in the current Part 97.

If we are going to have unattended traffic, there needs to at least be a ham-adminstered band-plan to keep it in a subband. Nobody wins if unattended traffic is a big HF band user in non-emergency operations.

Thanks

Bruce

A great many hams are lawyers. This has some interesting uses for our project, since codecs are one of the more litigious areas of technology. A pile-on defense is actually helpful, since the other side is generally trying to make you broke while you defend yourself. We can turn that around in the Free Software tradition.

And of course it helps with spectrum defense. But there is also an ARRL Spectrum Defense fund to which you are encouraged to donate.

probably mom wouldn't let dad kick him out.

How does this account for all the people committing suicide in Finland? There aren't many cheap chinese food places there

Finns in general have an asian genetic admixture. So, their food is chinese :-) . They also culturally drink incredible amounts of coffee. And there are cultural differences, including a stoicism that may lead to people getting less help for emotional issues. But perhaps the biggest issue is:

It's dark there. For much of the winter. People are sensitive to light.

You don't seriously think that you'd be the first person who had to go through having a gun taken under United States law. It happens every day, and be assured that the people whose weapons are confiscated are not paid for them.

I would protect that 12 year old by taking the guns from you and people like you. She is more at risk from people with guns than any other sort of assailant. 20 dead kids are sufficient proof of that.

The blood of 20 kids is on your hands and those of all of the other gun holders. But you won't take ownership for what you, and people like you, are responsible for. But I know, and lots of people like me know. It's you.

Of course it's realistic. And it wouldn't cost $300 Billion, that's silly. It's a firearm, not a lottery ticket. You make sure it's permanently disabled, or you find yourself on a labor crew away from home and your family for a few years. In my state, that sort of prisoner gets to work in the backwoods fire crew instead of jail.

The second amendment is not a problem. You aren't part of any militia. Far from it. And if you are, we have some countries where you can serve until you're over that idea.

The point is, it's time to get tough with folks who think they can arm themselves at the expense of little kids. Don't expect sympathy.

I am not providing a statistical argument because I don't need to. The only really workable gun control is no guns. You don't need statistics to explain that.

We will get rid of 300 million guns by criminalizing possession, buy-backs, and other strategies. It won't work perfectly, but it will be sufficiently effective to save lives.

My father had war trophies, including a German luger. He was sensible about guns, and thus would not allow one that could be fired in the house. So, he rendered his souvenirs unfireable.

Those trophies, however, were stolen when our home was robbed. Little of value other than that was taken. He was really glad he'd altered them.

That's what I think should be done to your collection. Fill the barrel with molten lead, and grind off the head of the firing pin. Have it done by someone who will certify it, or do it yourself and have it certified. Then, keep your collection. No problems with property rights.